Low-income families struggle in every major city in the country, but the District might be the most livable of them all. So goes a jaw-dropping new analysis released this week by the New York City-based Citizens Budget Commission.

The non-profit budget watchdog group has been tackling the issue of affordability, primarily testing the truth of the catchphrase, “The rent is too damn high.” Rent might be high, but the commission’s most recent report theorizes that housing costs alone might not be the best way to judge affordability. Instead, they analyzed a different federal standard that uses both rent and transportation costs.

“We think [this standard] makes sense, particularly because part of the value of housing is based on how it relates to transportation costs,” said Charles Brecher, the group’s consulting research director. “So it makes the most sense to look at the two things combined in a package.”

The results surprised researchers. Of 22 major cities in the United States, the District – which is in the throes of an affordable housing debate – ranked only behind San Francisco in terms of being most affordable for the prototypical low-income family. On average, a low-income family here spends about 43 percent of their money on rent and transportation costs.

Check out the full ranking:

Low-income family affordability

City

Percent of Income Rank

Amount

Percent of Income

San Francisco

1

$20,328

42%

Washington, D.C.

2

$20,038

43%

Philadelphia

3

$16,216

46%

Seattle

4

$18,119

47%

New York City

5

$16,756

47%

Chicago

6

$16,224

48%

Boston

7

$19,848

48%

San Jose

8

$24,232

52%

Los Angeles

9

$20,142

54%

Columbus

10

$16,995

55%

Dallas

11

$16,913

55%

Indianapolis

12

$17,332

56%

Atlanta

13

$18,116

56%

Austin

14

$18,620

56%

Houston

15

$16,701

57%

Miami

16

$18,041

57%

Detroit

17

$18,241

58%

Phoenix

18

$18,300

61%

San Diego

19

$21,918

62%

Jacksonville

20

$18,977

64%

Riverside

21

$20,768

71%

San Antonio

22

$17,565

71%

Source: Citizens Budget Commission.

Brecher, the consulting research director, explained the numbers are based on data sets from the 2010 census. The “low-income family” calculation is based on a three-person household with one person commuting, making 50 percent of the area median income. In the District, HUD data shows, that number would be about $46,600 (The 2014 number is closer to $48,000). Then, the calculation factored in the average cost of rent for a family in that income bracket, as well as the average cost of commuting to and from work.

By this standard, high-density cities with good public transportation systems will do best. Sprawling cities, and those without far-reaching public transportation, will be near the bottom.

What’s striking about this study is that there are large debates in urban cities, such as the District, about how astronomical rents costs are leaving behind everyone but the affluent. In a sense, it’s true. These cities are a lot more affordable for “single professionals” – defined in the study as making about 200 percent of the area’s per capita income. In the District, that number would be about $65,000. Whereas 43 percent of a poor family’s income must be put toward rent and transportation, the prototypical single professional only dedicates 29 percent of their income to such things. By this standard, the District is the most affordable city for single-professionals.

Check it out:

Single professional affordability

City

Percent of Income Rank

Amount

Percent of Income

Washington, D.C.

1

$18,820

29%

Philadelphia

2

$15,355

33%

San Francisco

3

$19,071

33%

Seattle

4

$17,618

33%

Houston

5

$15,004

33%

New York City

6

$16,156

34%

Boston

7

$19,035

34%

Chicago

8

$15,256

34%

Columbus

9

$15,661

37%

Dallas

10

$15,163

37%

Indianapolis

11

$15,466

37%

San Jose

12

$22,249

37%

Atlanta

13

$16,259

38%

Austin

14

$17,089

38%

Detroit

15

$16,250

40%

Jacksonville

16

$16,858

41%

San Antonio

17

$14,571

41%

Phoenix

18

$16,800

41%

San Diego

19

$20,182

44%

Miami

20

$16,158

44%

Los Angeles

21

$18,145

45%

Riverside

22

$18,118

51%

Source: Citizens Budget Commission.

Don’t celebrate yet, though. None of this study suggests it’s easy to be poor in any of these cities. The federal standards dictate that a “cost-burdened” household spends more than 45 percent of their income on rent and transportation. Even the most affordable cities on this list aren’t actually that affordable; all, at the very least, come close to cost-burdening their poor residents.

Also, the study has some limitations. Of course, not every family is a cookie-cutter example used in the analysis. And it doesn’t examine the affordability question for the very poor – residents who are food handlers, nurses aides, and receptionists, etc, – who make less than 30 percent of the area median income. Previous studies have shown those cost burdens increase as incomes decrease. In the Washington region, those families are the ones struggling the most to find and maintain housing.